Citations

Abstract Introduction Perception of penile curvature (PC) varies widely, and correction of PC is in the eye of the beholder. Objective We sought to investigate if patients with Peyronie’s Disease (PD) had differing opinions on correction of PC compared to general andrology (AD) patients without PD and general urology (URO) patients. Methods A cross-sectional survey was administered to adult patients in andrology and general urology clinics at 3 geographically separate institutions. Patients were grouped with having PD vs AD vs URO conditions. The survey consisted of unlabeled images of penis models with varying degrees of PC (range 10-90°). Respondents were asked to select the images they would want surgically corrected. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to identify demographic variables associated with willingness to consider correction. Results Ninety-four PD, 106 AD, and 302 URO patients were recruited. When comparing the 3 groups, besides obvious gender differences with PD patients, PD patients were less in 25-34 age range and more in 55-64 age range (p=0.01 and p=0.007). PD was less represented in Mid-Atlantic (p<0.001). 8% of PD, 12% of AD, and 20% of URO patients chose not to surgically correct any degree of PC (p=0.001). Among those who endorsed willingness to surgically correct PC, the average threshold for correction was 52.5° (SD 13) for PD, 37.2° (SD 29.5) for AD, and 51.0° (SD 19.9) for URO patients. When comparing PD patients with AD patients, no difference in the decision to surgically correct was found (p=0.42). This was also found to be the case when comparing PD with URO (p=0.46) and PD+AD patients vs URO (p=0.67). On univariable analysis, among AD patients, those ages 55-64 were more willing to undergo PC correction at lower degrees of PC (p=0.03) but did not hold up on multivariable analysis (p=0.40). No other demographic factors among PD and AD groups were found to have an impact on willingness to undergo PC correction (Table 1). Conclusions No significant differences were seen in the decision to surgically correct PC when comparing the perspectives of patients with PD, AD, and URO. Roughly 10% of all of these patients would defer on surgical management of any degree of PC. Despite having PC, no demographic differences were seen among PD patients’ willingness to correct PC. Disclosure No

Abstract Background Chronic injuries to the scapholunate ligament (SLIL) alter carpal kinematics and may progress to early degenerative osteoarthritis. To date, there is no consensus for the best method for SLIL reconstruction. This study aims to assess the use of growth factors (bone morphogenetic protein [BMP]2 and growth and differentiation factor 5 [GDF5]) for compartmentalized regeneration of bone and ligament in this multiphasic scaffold in a rabbit knee model. Case Description A total of 100 µg of BMP2 and 30 µg of GDF5 were encapsulated into a heparinized gelatin–hyaluronic acid hydrogel and loaded into the appropriate compartment of the multiphasic scaffold. The multiphasic scaffold was implanted to replace the native rabbit medial collateral ligament (n = 16). The rabbits were randomly assigned to two different treatment groups. The first group was immobilized postoperatively with the knee pinned in flexion with K-wires for 4 weeks (n = 8) prior to sacrifice. The second group was immobilized for 4 weeks, had the K-wires removed followed by a further 4 weeks of mobilization prior to sample harvesting. Literature Review Heterotopic ossification as early as 4 weeks was noted on gross dissection and confirmed by microcomputed tomography and histological staining. This analysis revealed formation of a bony bridge located within and over the ligament compartment in the intra-articular region. Biomechanical testing showed increased ultimate force of the ligament compartment at 4 weeks postimplantation consistent with the presence of bone formation and higher numbers of scaffold failures at the bone–tendon junction. This study has demonstrated that the addition of BMP2 and GDF5 in the bone–ligament–bone (BLB) scaffold resulted in heterotopic bone formation and failure of the ligament compartment. Clinical Relevance The implantation of a three-dimensional-printed BLB scaffold alone demonstrated superior biomechanical and histological results, and further investigation is needed as a possible clinical reconstruction for the SLIL.

Abstract Purpose We have previously described arthroscopic-assisted volar scapholunate (SL) capsulodesis as an alternative technique for addressing volar SL interosseous ligament (SLIL) injuries. In this article, we report the outcomes of this procedure in a cohort of patients. Methods Postoperative outcomes including range of motion, grip strength, visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH), and Mayo Wrist Score were assessed through a prospective review of six patients in a single center who underwent this procedure. Results Six patients (four male and two female) with a mean age of 43 ± 14 years were evaluated in the study. The mean duration of follow-up was 41 ± 17 weeks. Postoperative outcomes noted a reduction in VAS pain score from 8 before surgery to 0.7 postoperatively (p = 0.00004) and improvement in Mayo Wrist Score (42 preoperatively to 80 postoperatively; p = 0.001), grip strength (86% of contralateral side; p = 0.20), and flexion arc (81% of contralateral side; p = 0.08). QuickDASH was 20 ± 8 and Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation score was 13 ± 2 at the last clinical follow-up. There was an improvement in SL gap (p = 0.03), SL angle (p = 0.11), and radiolunate angle (p = 0.15) measurements postoperatively. Conclusions The described arthroscopic-assisted volar SL capsulodesis in this study presents an alternative method to address volar SLIL pathology with positive short-term clinical outcomes. Clinical Relevance Arthroscopic-assisted volar SL capsulodesis may be considered in the treatment algorithm for volar SLIL injuries.

Abstract Background Spanning bridge plates were first popularized for fixation of complex distal radius fractures. However, indications for their use have expanded including the surgical treatment algorithm for treating conditions such as Kienböck's disease. Traditionally, initial surgical treatment of Lichtman Stages II to III Kienböck's disease included lunate decompression, unloading, and revascularization procedures. The addition of a dorsal spanning bridge plate further facilitates lunate offloading and may improve bone revascularization. Case Description We report a complication of proximal carpal row dorsal subluxation secondary to dorsal spanning plate fixation in a patient with Stage IIIb Kienböck's disease. The patient had undergone wrist arthroscopy, lunate forage, radius core decompression, and spanning plate fixation. At 6 weeks after surgery, radiographic imaging demonstrated dorsal subluxation of the proximal carpal row that was corrected upon bridge plate removal. Serial radiographs during follow-up showed no further carpal subluxation without Kienböck's disease progression at 12 months postremoval of hardware. Patient remains pain free and has returned to elite level sport. Literature Review To our knowledge no previous cases of proximal carpal row subluxation with the use of dorsal bridge plate has been reported in the literature. Clinical Relevance Proximal row carpal subluxation can occur with dorsal bridge plate fixation.

Kaposi sarcoma (KS) can pose diagnostic challenges in biopsy specimens. Multiple histologic variants of cutaneous KS have been described; however, the histomorphologic spectrum of gastrointestinal (GI) KS has not been systematically studied. This large series comprehensively evaluated 46 cases of KS involving the GI tract and identified 7 histomorphologic variants, some that have not been previously described. Five of them are inconspicuous but have unique morphologic patterns, including lymphangioma/lymphangiectatic–like (n=17), mucosal hemorrhage/telangiectatic–like (n=17), mucosal inflammation–like (n=15), granulation tissue–like (n=13), and mucosal prolapse–like (n=4) variants. These variants can be easily misdiagnosed or misinterpreted on routine examination if KS is not considered, and if the immunohistochemical stain for human herpesvirus-8 is not performed. The other 2 morphologic variants present as spindle cell proliferations and are the GI stromal tumor–like (n=8) and inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor–like (n=2). These variants raise a broad differential diagnosis of spindle cell tumors of the GI tract and could pose diagnostic challenges. In summary, GI KS lesions exhibit variable, often unconventional histomorphologic patterns. KS should be included in the differential diagnosis even if features of conventional KS are not seen, particularly in limited biopsies in immunocompromised patients, such as those with human immunodeficiency virus infection. Although the clinical significance of these morphologic variants is yet to be determined, they are nonetheless important from a diagnostic standpoint. Misdiagnosis and delay in appropriate management can be avoided by recognizing the morphologic diversity of GI KS and appropriately utilizing the human herpesvirus-8 immunohistochemical stain.

Abstract Background: There is mixed evidence about the relations of current versus past cancer with severe COVID-19 outcomes and how they vary by patient and cancer characteristics. Methods: Electronic health record data of 104,590 adult hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were obtained from 21 United States health systems from February 2020 through September 2021. In-hospital mortality and ICU admission were predicted from current and past cancer diagnoses. Moderation by patient characteristics, vaccination status, cancer type, and year of the pandemic was examined. Results: 6.8% of the patients had current (n = 7,141) and 6.5% had past (n = 6,749) cancer diagnoses. Current cancer predicted both severe outcomes but past cancer did not; adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for mortality were 1.58 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.46–1.70] and 1.04 (95% CI, 0.96–1.13), respectively. Mortality rates decreased over the pandemic but the incremental risk of current cancer persisted, with the increment being larger among younger vs. older patients. Prior COVID-19 vaccination reduced mortality generally and among those with current cancer (aOR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.53–0.90). Conclusions: Current cancer, especially among younger patients, posed a substantially increased risk for death and ICU admission among patients with COVID-19; prior COVID-19 vaccination mitigated the risk associated with current cancer. Past history of cancer was not associated with higher risks for severe COVID-19 outcomes for most cancer types. Impact: This study clarifies the characteristics that modify the risk associated with cancer on severe COVID-19 outcomes across the first 20 months of the COVID-19 pandemic. See related commentary by Egan et al., p. 3

Abstract B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia (B-CLL) is the most common leukemia in adults with CD19-targeting CAR T-cell therapy showing an excellent initial curative response. However, 10-20% of patients who receive anti-C19 CAR T-cell treatment experience relapse due to CD19 antigen loss. B-cell activating factor receptor (BAFF-R) that is expressed on the surface of normal and neoplastic B cells mediates the survival of mature peripheral B cells along with the B-cell receptor. Since B-CLL is characterized by apoptotic disruption and subsequent accumulation of mature B cells, BAFF-R is a logical, novel target for CAR T-cell therapy directed against B-CLL, especially if CD19 antigen loss occurs. In this study, we first manufactured BAFF-R CAR T-cells by infecting healthy donor Tnaïve/memory (Tn/mem) cells with BAFF-R CAR lentivirus before evaluating the antitumor activity of BAFF-R CAR T-cells on wild type MEC-1 (a B-CLL cell line), modified MEC-1, and primary cell lines. Antigen-specific cytotoxicity and activation of the BAFF-R CAR T-cells or control CD19 CAR T-cells were determined upon incubation with B-CLL cell lines and patient-derived primary B-CLL by measuring degranulation and IFN-γ release, respectively. BAFF-R CAR T-cells demonstrated substantial cytotoxicity against MEC-1, CD19-deficient MEC-1, and primary B-CLL cell lines; CD19 CAR T-cells showed no effect on CD19-deficient MEC-1 cells but did show effects with primary B-CLL and MEC-1 cells. Similarly, the release of IFN-γ was greater when BAFF-R CAR T-cells were co-cultured with CD19-deficient MEC-1 or primary B-CLL compared to CD19 CAR T-cells co-cultured with CD19-deficient MEC-1. In summary, BAFF-R CAR T-cells exert significant antitumor properties not only on patient-derived primary B-CLL cells but also on a CD19-deficient B-CLL cell line. We, therefore, assert BAFF-R-targeting CAR T-cells to be a novel therapeutic avenue for patients newly diagnosed with B-CLL and patients experiencing relapsed B-CLL after anti-CD19 therapy. Citation Format: Yan Luo, Kaihin Lui, Tommy T. To, Andrew liu, Farah Yassine, Mohamed A. Kharfan Dabaja, Martha E. Gadd, Hong Qin. Antitumor activity of BAFF-R targeting CAR T-cells on chronic lymphocytic leukemia [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2022; 2022 Apr 8-13. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(12_Suppl):Abstract nr 2855.

Abstract Background: High-risk LBCL is associated with poor prognosis after first-line anti-CD20 mAb-containing regimens, highlighting the need for novel treatments. Axi-cel, an autologous anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, is approved for treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) LBCL after ≥2 lines of systemic therapy. Here we report the primary analysis of ZUMA-12, a Phase 2, multicenter, single-arm study of axi-cel as part of first-line therapy in patients with high-risk LBCL. Methods: Eligible adults had high-risk LBCL, defined by histology (double- or triple-hit status [MYC and BCL2 and/or BCL6 translocations] per investigator) or an IPI score ≥3, plus a positive interim PET per Lugano Classification (Deauville score [DS] 4/5) after 2 cycles of an anti-CD20 mAb and anthracycline-containing regimen. Patients underwent leukapheresis and received conditioning chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide and fludarabine) followed by a single axi-cel infusion at 2×10 6 CAR T cells/kg. Non-chemotherapy bridging could be administered before conditioning per investigator discretion. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed complete response (CR) rate per Lugano. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR; CR + partial response), duration of response (DOR), event-free survival (EFS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), incidence of adverse events (AEs), and levels of CAR T cells in blood and cytokines in serum. The primary analysis occurred after all treated patients had ≥6 months of follow-up. Results: As of May 17, 2021, 42 patients were enrolled and 40 were treated with axi-cel. Median age was 61 years (range, 23-86); 68% of patients were male, 63% had ECOG 1, 95% had stage III/IV disease, 48% had DS4, 53% had DS5, 25% had double- or triple-hit status per central assessment, and 78% had IPI score ≥3. A total of 37 patients had centrally confirmed double- or triple-hit histology or an IPI score ≥3 and were evaluable for response, with 15.9 months of median follow-up (range, 6.0-26.7). The CR rate was 78% (n=29; 95% CI, 62-90); 89% of patients had an objective response, and median time to initial response was 1 month. Among all 40 treated patients, 90% had an objective response (80% CR rate). At data cutoff, 73% of response-evaluable patients had ongoing responses. Medians for DOR, EFS, and PFS were not reached; 12-month estimates were 81%, 73%, and 75%, respectively. The estimated OS at 12 months was 91%. All 40 treated patients had AEs of any grade; 85% of patients had Grade ≥3 AEs, most commonly cytopenias (68%). Grade ≥3 cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurologic events (NEs) occurred in 3 patients (8%) and 9 patients (23%), respectively. Median times to onset of CRS and NEs were 4 days (range, 1-10) and 9 days (range, 2-44), with median durations of 6 days and 7 days, respectively. All CRS and most NEs (28/29) of any grade resolved by data cutoff (1 ongoing Grade 1 tremor); 39/40 CRS events resolved by 14 days post-infusion and 19/29 NEs resolved by 21 days post-infusion. Tocilizumab was administered to 63% and 3% of patients for management of CRS or NEs, respectively; corticosteroids were administered to 35% and 33% of patients for CRS and NE management. One Grade 5 event of COVID-19 occurred (Day 350). Median peak CAR T-cell level in all treated patients was 36 cells/µL (range, 7-560), and median expansion by AUC 0-28 was 495 cells/µL × days (range, 74-4288). CAR T-cell levels peaked at a median of 8 days post-infusion (range, 8-37). Higher frequency of CCR7+CD45RA+ T cells in axi-cel product, previously associated with greater expansion of CAR T cells (Locke et al. Blood Adv. 2020), was observed in ZUMA-12, compared with the ZUMA-1 study in R/R LBCL (Neelapu et al. New Engl J Med. 2017). Conclusion: In the primary analysis of ZUMA-12, axi-cel demonstrated a high rate of rapid and complete responses in patients with high-risk LBCL, a population with high unmet need. With 15.9 months of median follow-up, responses were durable as medians for DOR, EFS, and PFS were not yet reached and over 70% of patients remained in response at data cutoff. No new safety signals were reported with axi-cel in an earlier line. Overall, axi-cel may benefit patients exposed to fewer prior therapies, and further trials in first-line high-risk LBCL are warranted to assess axi-cel in this setting. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Neelapu: Kite, a Gilead Company, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Celgene, Pfizer, Allogene, Kuur, Incyte, Precision BioSciences, Legend, Adicet Bio, Calibr, and Unum Therapeutics: Other: personal fees; Kite, a Gilead Company, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Poseida, Cellectis, Celgene, Karus Therapeutics, Unum Therapeutics (Cogent Biosciences), Allogene, Precision BioSciences, Acerta and Adicet Bio: Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceuticals and related to cell therapy: Patents & Royalties; Kite, a Gilead Company, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Celgene, Pfizer, Allogene Therapeutics, Cell Medica/Kuur, Incyte, Precision Biosciences, Legend Biotech, Adicet Bio, Calibr, Unum Therapeutics and Bluebird Bio: Honoraria. Dickinson: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodation, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Munoz: Kite, a Gilead Company, Kyowa, Bayer, Pharmacyclics/Janssen, Seagen, Acrotech/Aurobindo, Beigene, Verastem, AstraZeneca, Celgene/BMS, Genentech/Roche.: Speakers Bureau; Bayer, Gilead/Kite Pharma, Celgene, Merck, Portola, Incyte, Genentech, Pharmacyclics, Seattle Genetics, Janssen, and Millennium: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics/Abbvie, Bayer, Kite, a Gilead Company, Pfizer, Janssen, Juno/Celgene, Bristol Myers Squibb, Kyowa Kirin, Alexion, Fosun Kite, Innovent, Seagen, BeiGene, Debiopharm, Epizyme, Karyopharm, ADC Therapeutics, Servier, and Genmab: Consultancy, Other: advisory role; Alexion, AstraZeneca Rare Disease: Other: Study investigator; Targeted Oncology, OncView, Kyowa Kirin, Physicians' Education Resource, and Seagen: Honoraria. Thieblemont: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses ; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses ; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses ; Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses ; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses , Research Funding; Incyte: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses ; Cellectis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses ; Hospira: Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses . Oluwole: Pfizer: Consultancy; Curio Science: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding. Herrera: Takeda: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seagen: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Tubulis: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy. Ujjani: Loxo: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Epizyme: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; ACDT: Honoraria; Kite, a Gilead Company: Honoraria; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Research Funding; Atara Bio: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Lin: Sorrento: Consultancy; Legend: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gamida Cell: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Juno: Consultancy; Vineti: Consultancy; Takeda: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding. Riedell: Bayer: Honoraria; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Morphosys: Research Funding; Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Verastem Oncology: Honoraria; Kite, a Gilead Company: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy; Calibr: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Tessa Therapeutics: Research Funding. Kekre: Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Lui: Gilead Sciences: Other: stock or other ownership; Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment, Other: travel support. Milletti: Kite, a Gilead company: Current Employment; Gilead Sciences: Other: stock or other ownership . Dong: Kite, a Gilead Company: Current Employment; Gilead Sciences: Other: stock or other ownership ; GliaCure/Tufts: Consultancy, Other: advisory role, Patents & Royalties. Xu: Kite, A Gilead Company: Current Employment; Gilead Sciences: Other: stock or other ownership . Chavez: MorphoSys, Bayer, Karyopharm, Kite, a Gilead Company, Novartis, Janssen, AbbVie, TeneoBio, and Pfizer: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merk: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; MorphoSys, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Genentech, Kite, a Gilead Company, and Epizyme: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Speakers Bureau.